Dades sindicals:

In this section, candidate analysis will be based on a grading system. The desired re- sult of this grading process is to select the ERP vendor with the highest score to be the potential ERP supplier of ThaiLai Ltd.

8.1 Key factor grading

To begin with, the author will weigh the key factors that are used as criteria to select the software (see 3.5). The scale used here is from 1 to 4; whereas 1 means having the least influence, and 4 means having the most influence. The values obtained will serve the final step of grading each software.

Table 3. Grading of key factors

Key factor Score

Functionality 3.5

Technical aspects 3

Money 4

Support and service 3 Compatibility of the system 2

Functionality: Even though functionality is the first factor to consider when selecting a vendor, ThaiLai’s basic needs easily make all the vendors eligible to fulfill them. Therefore, being important and highly possible leads to score of 3.5 for this factor. Technical aspects: Having an up-to-date system ensures daily works can be done with the least possible technical issues. User-friendly interface is important as well. In ThaiLai, there are some middle-aged employees who are not very good at compu- ting. Changing their familiar way of work to something new might cause necessary difficulty for them if the interface is too complicated to use. Therefore, a score of 3 is given to this factor.

Money: After short consultation with ERP suppliers, the author noticed that the ERP packages they provide have lots of similarities and they all can fulfill the require- ments from ThaiLai. That is when realization about importance of the cost becomes

very clear. ThaiLai has a limit for the budget to purchase an ERP package. If other cri- teria can be met without difficulty, the cost of the packages will influence the final decision considerably. Therefore, the high score of 4 is given to this factor.

Support and service: For a company that has no experience in using any ERP system before, some confusion and mistakes are inevitable. Having support and service at hand is definitely important. However, since ThaiLai has their offices in the big cities of Vietnam, where the vendors also have their bases in, communication, user train- ing, technical supporting, maintenance service, etc. is not a difficult task. Therefore, the score for this factor is 3.

Compatibility of the system: The ERP systems mentioned above do not have any spe- cial requirements for the working computers at ThaiLai. In fact, ThaiLai changed to new computers 2 years ago, so that all the machines are in good working condition. Because this factor is met easily, the score for its importance will be 2.

8.2 Candidate grading

In this section, each ERP system will be graded upon different selection criteria (5 key factors). The score given to the system will range from 1 to 5. Whereas, 1: least eligi- ble; 2: partly eligible; 3: eligible; 4: largely eligible; 5: most eligible.

Table 4. ERP system grading

SureERP 3S ERP Asia Enterprise

Functionality (3.5) 4 3 5

Technical aspects (3) 4 4 4

Money (4) 4 2 4

Support and service (3) 5 4 5

Compatibility of the system (2) 4 4 4

Functionality: The reason Asia Enterprise got 5 is because it is from a vendor that has lots of experience in designing system for small retailer. 3S ERP belongs to a vendor whose majority of client is big-sized company, and the features of their ERP package

is not very flexible, score for this system will be 3. SureERP’s focus is on SMEs also, however comparing to Asia Enterprise who is confident that they are specialized for small retailing companies, SureERP gets score of 4.

Technical aspects: The systems got same score of 4. As long-term software updates and bug fixing are guaranteed to be important aspect of the packages. User-friendly interface is basically the aim of every ERP system developer. However, not until real- life experience, could one say much about how ‘user-friendly’ a system actually is. An equal score goes for all candidates.

Money: SureERP and Asia Enterprise got score of 4 each, since the estimated cost is in the range of ThaiLai’s budget. The score is not 5 because the implementation has not taken place yet, possibilities of hidden extra cost might show up. 3S ERP got 2 be- cause the cost can be high and hidden additional cost is a possibility.

Support and service: SureERP and Asia Enterprise got score of 5 for each. The reason is that those 2 vendors have offices in 3 cities – same cities that ThaiLai locates. Training for ThaiLai employees can be easier because of geographical advantage, and technical support can be reached more easily. 3S ERP got score of 4 because they only share 2 cities, where they base, with ThaiLai.

Compatibility of the system: The 3 systems got same score of 4, as they all require pretty much the same thing, and that ThaiLai’s own equipment can fulfill the require- ments since ThaiLai had bought new good equipment not so long ago.

The final result of candidate selection is described by the matrix below.

From the results, it is a clear difference between 3S ERP and the remaining candi- dates. Therefore, SureERP will not be recommended to ThaiLai as a potential sup- plier. Although Asia Enterprise has higher score, the difference isn’t considerable. Hence, both SureERP and Asia Enterprise will be recommended to ThaiLai Ltd.